Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Full story: Newsday 306,952
Thousands of abortion opponents marched from the National Mall to the Supreme Court on Tuesday in their annual remembrance of the court's Roe v. Wade decision. Full Story

“Dan IS the Man”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#278265 Jan 20, 2013
Chick Brilliance Returns wrote:
<quoted text>
And this:
Cops Shot, Corrections Worker Dead in NJ Police Station Shootout
http://abcnews.go.com/US/jersey-police-statio...
Oh and here is what happens when you have a bunch of responsible, legal, gun owners in one place:
UPDATED: 5 People Shot At 3 Different Gun Shows On Gun Appreciation Day
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/01/19/1...
Isn't it too bad there were no people with guns around to prevent these senseless shootings?
Yes, and there was the well publicized story about the gun show in Massachusetts where a little boy lost control of his father's Uzi and blew his own head off. The father and the person running the gun show were "responsible" legal gun owners. I showed Seattle a story about a "responsible" gun owner who mistook a little girl for a skunk and shot and killed her.

I could dig these kinds of stories up all day, but the point is that responsible, decent people legally own guns and not only do we still have crimes and murders (including public mass murders) but we also have stupid senseless accidents that result in deaths.

Their vision of gun-toting citizens deterring crimes clearly is not at all realistic.

“Game on !”

Since: Aug 09

nyc

#278266 Jan 20, 2013
Conservative Democrat wrote:
<quoted text>
And just how do you support my validation her position, when I've expressly stated I disagree with her opinion?
C'mon. I explained what her position was and you said "there is nothing wrong with that".
Prove it's wrong. In your reply post to Lynne you, albeit inadvertently, validated my contention with regard to the 50% gas exchange ratio. Or did you think I missed reading that post?
It was not inadvertent genius. I purposely validated your contention to illustrate my point, although I don't necesarily agree with your percentages. There is no way to quantify what is 50% or what is 48%....or what is 52%. One physicians 50% may be another's 45% or another's 55%. What I do agree with is the basic premise that a physician must first conclude that an infant possesses the minimal basic lung function to survive before he applies medical assistance.
"she would have to acknowledge that a fetus that can only handle 50% of the gas exchange on its own, would still require some artificial support to handle the remaining 50%"
Which has been my contention since the viability argument began; that once the 50% gas exchange ratio is reached, the fetus is viable. Any medical assistance applied to reach the 100% gas exchange ratio is merely "support" and not a requirement for rendering the fetus as "viable."
There you go again. I NEVER claimed that medical assistance was a requirement for rendering an assessment of viability. Stop it !
I am saying that the requirement for medical assistance does not PRECLUDE a determination of viability.
Hence the reason why "with medical assistance" is not a necessary element of viability, but a necessary element to ensure survival by means of achieving 100% O2/CO2 exchange.
I never said it was a NECESSARY element. You are exasperatingly dense.
You got your wires crossed Doc. It's always been you who's argued that the definition of viability is WITH medical assistance,
Flat out lie. It is with OR without medical assistance.

“Dan IS the Man”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#278267 Jan 20, 2013
J Connor wrote:
We are a group of military veterans and we support the right for mentally well balanced, adults to own a firearm if the wish to do so. We do not support mentally disturbed people having access to firearms, either as owners or someone else's firearm. This issues needs common sense, good judgement and or adult supervision. Our focus is on buying American and creating jobs for Americans, but this gun violence issue has to addressed and we have to accept that in order to make society a little safer, we gun owners have to start using better judgment with securing our firearms,(so they don't get easily stolen or picked up by someone in our household) and gun sales have to be limited to people who are sane enough to qualify for a job at the nuclear power plant. The The MMPI-2 is most commonly used by mental health professionals to assess and diagnose mental illness. The The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory or MMPI-2 has been utilized in other fields outside of clinical psychology. The test is often used in legal cases, including criminal defense and custody disputes. The test has also been used as screening instrument for certain professions, especially high risk jobs. We make it a LOT easier to find "Made in USA" products but find that some people still buy imported goods even though they know it cost Americans their job opportunities. Some people want government tariffs to control their purchase decisions for them. It might be the same with the 2nd Amendment...we might just need more adult supervision. John C. UnitedAmericanConsumer dot com
Unrealistic. How will you prevent "mentally disturbed" people from obtaining guns illegally? How rigorous will the testing be before a prospective gun buyer is deemed not "mentally disturbed"? What will you do about people who buy guns and are not mentally disturbed but become mentally disturbed later in life? And how many "mentally disturbed" teens have stolen guns from their non-mentally disturbed parents?

“Game on !”

Since: Aug 09

nyc

#278268 Jan 20, 2013
(continued)
by virtue of the fact that it does not expressly state "WITHOUT." By the same presumptive standard you give that definition, it's axiomatic why it is you can't understand the only core purpose for FHLs. Seems to me that for someone who claims higher intellect, you miss the premise of things far too often.
So you're saying a fetus with a 40% ability for O2/CO2 exchange is as viable as a fetus with a 70% ability for the same exchange, because one will need medical assistance and the other may not need it?
A fetus/infant is either viable or it is not....whether it needs medical assistance to reach complete independence or whether it is already at the point of complete medical independence.
Does the term "sword and a shield" mean anything to you Doc???
So now you think your argument amounts to "plenty of condition precedent that qualifies a fetus as viable WITH medical assistance."
Lovely!!

A preemie on medical assistance IS already viable.
PRECISELY !!!
So how can you say that there is nothing wrong with Bitter's contention that a preemie can REACH viability with medical assistance ? If it is receiving medical assistance than a physician has already deemed it to be VIABLE.
Barring mom and dad being Mr. and Mrs. Donald Trump (figuratively speaking of course), medicine will not waste efforts, nor insurance companies pay for medical assistance for nonviable preemies. At any rate, it's morel likely than not that medical assistance of a non-viable preemie will not preclude death, especially if it is a severely premature baby.
When you invent the means by which the percentage of gas exchange can be accurately measured, let me know.
No need to. A physician will always be the one to determine, based on his knowledge and experience, whether or not a preemie has the minimal basic function to benefit from medical assistance.

“Game on !”

Since: Aug 09

nyc

#278269 Jan 20, 2013
Conservative Democrat wrote:
<quoted text>
I am an attorney. I'm also human. As are you. Neither of us are right 100% of the time, although in this instance, I am.
Yes you are. What you're wrong about is claiming that there is nothing wrong with the contention of others ( chicky, moncie, katie, bitter, tinker bell, et al )
I agree it involves no presumption on your part. It involves ignorance, which is far worse.
If an infant has a 50% or greater ability to make the gas exchange in its lungs, on its own; is it more likely than not that it can survive, when compared to one who has less, especially far less than 50%?

If your answer is in the positive, then the fetus is viable and medical assistance is irrelevant to the fact that it is viable.
Very good. The only problem is that to the others....medical assistance is NOT irrelevant to viability. According to them if a preemie requires medical assistance....it is NOT viable.
And therein lies the CRUX of the issue.
Again, if an infant has a 50% or greater ability to make the gas exchange in its lungs, on its own; is it more likely than not that it can survive, when compared to one who has less, especially far less than 50%? If your answer is in the positive, then the fetus is viable and medical assistance is irrelevant to the fact that it is viable.
Ok, so we agree. Medical assistance exists for the purpose of augmenting the chance of survival from 50% to 100%.
Now let me turn your question around for you; how many infants born at less than 24 weeks gestational age do you know that got medical assistance?

I don't know. How many do you know ? What I do know is that if they did receive medical assistance, it means that the attending physician made a determination of viability.

[QUOTE]You'll have to excuse my 50'sh inability to read minds; who's "their?" I've always been under the impression that's YOUR definition.
Nope, it was THEIR's. And cut the "reading minds" crap. I've mentioned countless times who the dunderheads are that promote the totally wrong and asinine definition of viability. It's what this discussion has been about from the beginning. Do you have ADD ?

“Game on !”

Since: Aug 09

nyc

#278270 Jan 20, 2013
Long Night Moon 13 wrote:
<quoted text>
He didn't mention it just once...we argued over it for several days and there's plenty of posts where he brought up the cop thing, so they would be easy to find.
No need to. I'll find them. I remember the discussion well. He never claimed that they NEVER attack police stations. He claimed that the fact that police possessed weapons was a deterrent to such behavior.
And it is. The fact that you come up with an example of one nutjob who did it, and did it gutlessly and anonymously under the cloak of darkness, does not negate the deterrent effect.
Deterrent does not mean to stop completely or eliminate.

“Game on !”

Since: Aug 09

nyc

#278271 Jan 20, 2013
elise in burque wrote:
<quoted text>Don't hate, baby. I'm not the one who brought up the subject of caregiving. It was one of you PLs. Try to keep your sour grapes in check.
Hate ? Why would someone who urges others to "not take everything so seriously"....see hate in the most innocuous of statements ?
I wuv your nurse stories.

C'mon.....now it's been 20 minutes.
Katie

Puyallup, WA

#278272 Jan 20, 2013
Doc Degall wrote:
<quoted text>
This is the end.....my only friend....the end.
Ride the highway west baby.
:)

Since: Dec 09

Location hidden

#278274 Jan 20, 2013
SeattleVehix44 wrote:
<quoted text>
almost all the liberals on here, actually.......ask them, most every one believes its not a person until birth........ive debated them on it, they're nuts
Doesn't matter whether they believe it's a person, I asked who on here supports elective abortions up to the day before delivery?
Katie

Puyallup, WA

#278273 Jan 20, 2013
Doc Degall wrote:
<quoted text>
Katie was infamous for her "FOAD"'s and calling people AH's. I guess it's OK when you call people names disguised as acronyms.
But call her delusional and watch her get all bent outta shape at the vile "name callers".
As if you or any other PLer hasn't called names? You don't think it's funny when I resort to calling you "name caller"? It's better than AH, isn't it?

Elise gave great advice; don't hate, Doc.
It's a new year. Make the best of it :)
Katie

Puyallup, WA

#278275 Jan 20, 2013
Long Night Moon 13 wrote:
<quoted text>
I never said that, liar. I never said anything about taking guns away from decent people either, Liar.
Why don't you actually try comprehending what you read for once.
What do you mean, "...try comprehending..."? You're asking for the impossible.

I think you're right with your analogy for comparison of stopping drunk driving by having everyone drive drunk. Ahhh the good ol' days, LNM. Raising your open beer to the cop driving along side you, racing with you down the highway... Good times, man.

Since: Jun 08

Atrisco Village

#278276 Jan 20, 2013
Doc Degall wrote:
<quoted text>
Hate ? Why would someone who urges others to "not take everything so seriously"....see hate in the most innocuous of statements ?
I wuv your nurse stories.
C'mon.....now it's been 20 minutes.
20 minutes? Hmmm, distorted sense of time, I see. Did your little vacation involve a brain injury? Que malo:-( Anyway, abuelito, at least my stories are true. That's not something you can say with honesty about you and your clan.
Katie

Puyallup, WA

#278277 Jan 20, 2013
Long Night Moon 13 wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, and there was the well publicized story about the gun show in Massachusetts where a little boy lost control of his father's Uzi and blew his own head off. The father and the person running the gun show were "responsible" legal gun owners. I showed Seattle a story about a "responsible" gun owner who mistook a little girl for a skunk and shot and killed her.
I could dig these kinds of stories up all day, but the point is that responsible, decent people legally own guns and not only do we still have crimes and murders (including public mass murders) but we also have stupid senseless accidents that result in deaths.
Their vision of gun-toting citizens deterring crimes clearly is not at all realistic.
Two from last March --
"3-year-old boy in Wash. kills self with gun in car"
"It was western Washington's third recent shooting by a child."
http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/201774...

Cop's kid kills sibling --
"STANWOOD, Wash. The 7-year-old daughter of a Marysville police officer died Sunday after being shot by her young sibling on Saturday.

Police say at about 3:30 p.m. Saturday, two children were left alone in a van parked just off Highway 532 in Stanwood."
http://www.king5.com/news/local/Child-reporte...

Both preventable.

Since: Jun 08

Atrisco Village

#278278 Jan 20, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
As if you or any other PLer hasn't called names? You don't think it's funny when I resort to calling you "name caller"? It's better than AH, isn't it?
Elise gave great advice; don't hate, Doc.
It's a new year. Make the best of it :)
Doc is stuck in his very own little time warp. He thinks it's still 1980. I bet he wears a polyester suit. Be kind;-)
grumpy

Stony Point, NY

#278279 Jan 20, 2013
Tom Tom wrote:
<quoted text>
The right of the people to bear and keep arms..Congress shall make no law infringing on.
Stop the parsing words, ya crazy old Zionist kutt. Ya know I love ya.
Where does it say they can take you rright away of you are not a felon?
Stick with Chicadee, shamelessly trying to make the Newton tagedy all about her and her pro-abortion anti-gun political agenda. No class, like the rest of the pagans..
Parsing is the tactic of strict interpretationists. I'm using their logic against them.
1)Where does the Constitution say that a felon cannot bear and keep arms.

2) Where does the Constitution say that a state cannot enact laws infringing on the rights to bear and keep arms.
You're a defender of states rights. Yes or no?

3) Where does is say that people can't buy a cannon?
Katie

Puyallup, WA

#278280 Jan 20, 2013
AyakaNeo wrote:
<quoted text>Doesn't matter whether they believe it's a person, I asked who on here supports elective abortions up to the day before delivery?
Aren't they illegal at that point anyway? Do these people ever think anything through?

Since: Dec 09

Location hidden

#278281 Jan 20, 2013
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
I geuss since there have been cases where babies were born during an abrtion attempt, then some one does.
You mean you assume. How many cases of born alive abortions have there been in the past 10 years since the Born Alive Infants Act? How many cases could there possibly be of infants being born alive during a legal abortion if 90+ percent of abortions occur in the first trimester?
Gtown71 wrote:
So how about 2 days before?
3?
A week?
How about it? You're making the assumption not me.
Gtown71 wrote:
Most on here so far don't believe the life inside the womb is a baby until birth, so not sure what answer you are looking for.
Well when you believe a fetus in utero is a person, or a human being with equal rights or rights that usurp the person (mom) it is inside of then I would have to agree that it isn't a baby (person, human being) until it's born.
Gtown71 wrote:
-on the other comment.
I never said kill as many as I could before I found religion.
I found God, or better yet -God found me.
Ok you said before you were saved you would have killed as many as you could. My mistake.
"I would not kill cops, if they came to take my guns, but before I was saved 13 years ago -I would've killed as many as possible, and many many people would do just that, before the cops kill them WITH GUNS!!!"
Katie

Puyallup, WA

#278282 Jan 20, 2013
elise in burque wrote:
<quoted text>Doc is stuck in his very own little time warp. He thinks it's still 1980. I bet he wears a polyester suit. Be kind;-)
His running suit! LOLOL

“Game on !”

Since: Aug 09

nyc

#278283 Jan 20, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
As if you or any other PLer hasn't called names?[/QUOTe]

I never said we didn't.

[QUOTE]You don't think it's funny when I resort to calling you "name caller"?
Actually I do think it's funny....and hypocritical that you would call others "name caller" when you are one of the worst offenders.
It's better than AH, isn't it?
It's all relative.
Elise gave great advice; don't hate, Doc.
The story telling nurse needs to heed her own advice. When you see hate where there is none, it's clear you are the one with the problem.

Since: Jun 08

Atrisco Village

#278284 Jan 20, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
His running suit! LOLOL
Except, instead of running in it, he wears it to the VFW on Friday nights.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Baltimore Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Meri chut her waqt geeli kyun rehti hai? 2 hr Aaria 1
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 2 hr shinningelectr0n 1,153,060
Stop Maryland's season of cruelty: fall bow hun... (Sep '07) 10 hr Raptor in Michigan 120,226
gay in Towson Maryland 13 hr Kandin 8
The 25 Most Dangerous Cities in the U.S. Are Mo... (Nov '10) 20 hr Jim Jones 19,549
snapchat usernames! (Nov '13) Tue jamielee 103
Officer-involved shooting in West Baltimore Tue Tragic 2
Baltimore Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Baltimore People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Baltimore News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Baltimore

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 11:21 am PST

NBC Sports11:21AM
Who's in worse shape, Redskins or Bears?
NBC Sports11:30 AM
Ravens sign Chris Greenwood
Yahoo! Sports12:48 PM
Redskins have been this bad since the 1960s
Bleacher Report 1:04 PM
Ravens Can't Let Banged Up Secondary Derail Playoff Hopes
Yahoo! Sports 3:29 PM
Dumervil, Suggs provide 1-2 punch for sack-happy Ravens